Talk:Centrolophus
 | This page was expanded as part of The Great Britain and Ireland Destubathon, March 2020. |
 | A fact from Centrolophus appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 28 March 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Copyright problem removed edit
This article was based on the corresponding section in Ayling's Collins Guide to the Sea Fishes of New Zealand, and/or corresponding articles at fishbase.org or niwascience.co.naz, none of which are compatibly licensed for Wikipedia. It has been revised on this date as part of a large-scale project to remove infringement from these sources. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. (For background on this situation, please see the related administrator's noticeboard discussion and the cleanup task force subpage.) Thank you. --Geronimo20 (talk) 21:07, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Requested move 28 March 2020 edit
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 00:39, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
Black ruff → Centrolophus – This species/genus has multiple vernacular names that are in common use. Worse, the "official" name recognized by FAO is "rudderfish", while AFS uses "black ruff" (see FishBase). Among the common reliable sources that we use, FishBase uses "rudderfish" while IUCN gives that name first but also recognizes "black ruff" and "blackfish". This seems to be a classic case of widespread species with different naming traditions in different parts of its range, and thus a case where the scientific name should be used. As a monotypic genus, the article shoud be under the genus name. Micromesistius (talk) 10:27, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- move - Centrolophus has 920 results on Scholar, “black ruff” has only 213, and the first few results are not for this fish. Rudderfish has 1230 hits but many are for other fish. The genus name is best. Disambig pages should be made at the other names. --awkwafaba (📥) 04:48, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Only sensible article name, and consistent with practice with regard to other articles. Andrewa (talk) 12:19, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Support, scientific name is PRECISE and CONSISTENT with most fish genus articles. Scientific name is most commonly used in reliable sources. Plantdrew (talk) 04:22, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
- Support the use of the scientific name, - in this case the genus name as the taxon is monotypic. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:12, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.